Interview with Mr. Sálvano Briceño,
UNISDR Director

In your opinion, what should be done so that
efforts for disaster risk reduction are more
effective? What would be the key changes?

The most important change must take place at the
political level, among decision-makers. The leadership
in a country must prioritize the issue because it requires
a change of attitude, values and behavior. All this must
be encouraged by those in leadership positions. This
is the most important change. In countries where
the authorities take the lead in risk reduction, people
follow and pay more attention.

In your opinion, what are the major challenges
that people face in the region to reduce both
risk and vulnerabilities? How can these be
overcome?

There are two obstacles that, while not very common,
are very real: the first is a culture of believing that
disasters are natural. With this mindset, people assume
that disasters are inevitable. If they are natural, then
nothing can be done to prevent them. But what is
actually natural is the hazard or the danger, not the
disaster itself. There are natural hazards, but disasters
are manmade, for instance, by building houses in
places where they should not be built. How can we
change this culture so that disasters are not regarded
as natural? By insisting that disasters are caused by
vulnerability to natural hazards.

In your opinion, what is the greatest obstacle
to disaster reduction, lack of political will or
scarce economic resources?

I believe that it is primarily the lack of political will
because that is what is required to bring about change.
If we want to change a situation there must be political
will among government leaders, heads of State and
government, and the ministries. Economic leaders and
the private sector should also promote risk reduction.
This is what makes change happen.

Which do you think is more important for risk
reduction, technology or education? Why?

Definitely education. Technology is also important
but we have to begin by educating people. If they are
not aware, do not understand, and do not know what
this is all about, then they will not use the technology
either. So education must come first. Once people
understand that they can do something to reduce
their vulnerability —by looking at how and where
their houses are built, how their children’s schools,
hospitals and workplaces are built— then they will do
something about it.

How would you define a “culture of
prevention”? In your opinion, what should be
done to change people’s attitudes?

It is very similar to what happens with health. Over the
past few years, we have seen how people have learned
to take better care of themselves, to eat better, to
exercise, to take a number of measures to reduce
the risk of becoming sick. Now everyone knows that
if they eat well, exercise and take care of themselves,
they will get sick less often. The same is true of natural
hazards. People who pay attention to how their houses
are built — the materials used, whether flammable
materials are involved, whether their houses are
vulnerable to wind, hurricanes or earthquakes—, can
prevent disasters. Preventing is anticipating what could
happen. This is true of health and disasters, which also
affect everyone.

Realistically speaking, of the initiatives in
which the UNISDR has been involved, which
have had a significant impact in terms of risk
reduction in the region in recent years? Why?
How?

There are initiatives at different levels. Some have
been undertaken jointly with governments, such as the
creation and promotion of national platforms. This has
led some countries, such as Mexico, Cuba, Jamaica and
Chile, to take more of an interest in the issue. Some
countries are doing very good work that began with a
process we supported. There are also specific initiatives
such as radio drama series. In Central America, the
series have influenced people to think about the issue
and realize that there is something they can do. The
first radio drama was called “Tiempos de Huracanes”
[Times of Hurricanes], and the second was “Réplicas
del Corazón” [Tremors of the Heart]. These have been
very good educational initiatives. In addition, Riskland
is a board game that children are playing more and
more, and they are learning a lot from it. Therefore,
there are many initiatives I could mention.

Do you think that we can learn more from
past good practices or from bad practices?
Please provide examples.

I think that, generally speaking, one learns more from
bad practices than from good ones, because when we
make a mistake and then suffer the consequences, we
become more interested in change. However, there are
some very important and useful practices too. When,
for instance, we see a country where no one dies in
a hurricane —such as in Cuba, where almost nobody
dies when a hurricane hits— while next door, the same
hurricane kills one or two thousand people, such as
in Haiti, this should tell us something. We must learn
from the good practices in Cuba in order to reduce risk
in countries like Haiti. In addition, there is more clarity
about many activities. For instance, we now know what
type of construction and materials create risk and lead
to the destruction of a house or a building when facing
a natural hazard.

What makes investments in risk reduction
cost-effective for governments and how does
this translate into practical terms?

This is a very important issue that we are currently
studying. We are working jointly with the World Bank
and the UN Secretariat on a cost-benefit analysis
of investment in prevention, because it is very easy
to say that investing in prevention saves money, but
governments want specific figures. We are currently
working on this. There is no question that disaster
response is becoming more costly and that disasters are
having increasingly serious impacts. This is not because
natural hazards are worse, but because there are more
people on the planet who live in high-risk areas and
behave inappropriately. As vulnerability increases,
disasters will worsen and become more expensive.
Prevention will become increasingly justifiable. Again,
we are conducting a cost-benefit analysis to equip
governments with more specific arguments in favor of
investing in prevention.

What is the role of governance in this
context?

Well, governance is what we discussed at the
beginning: the need for leaders to get involved. If the
president of a country states that the government
plan will prioritize risk reduction, in order to reduce
mortality and the economic impact of natural hazards,
then s/he will prioritize the issue and organize the
administration around it, since risk reduction requires
the involvement of many sectors. This is a common
theme in terms of the governance needed to address
this issue, because when it comes to risk reduction, no
single ministry can do it all. They must all be involved
along with civil society representatives, the private
sector and the media. Everyone must play a role in
terms of advocacy and risk prevention, but actions
must begin at the highest levels.

In an ideal world, free of political interests,
what approach would you apply to risk
reduction? Why?

First, I do not think that in an ideal world there should
be no political interests, because these are also people’s
interests. Hence, in a world full of people, we will always
have political interests. I do think that we should avoid
selfish interests, selfish political interests, or as we say
political maneuvering. But politics is necessary. Politics
is the art of co-existing as a society and it is inevitable.
It is not a matter of just doing politics, but rather of
doing better politics. In this sense, it would be ideal
if politicians showed concern for people’s well-being,
especially that of the most vulnerable, poorest groups,
rather than just help the richest, as is so often the case.
People with money and resources have the ability to
advocate for themselves. Those lacking such resources
need the government’s help. So, in an ideal world,
governments should work more to improve the living
conditions of the poorest.

Pretend you are an inventor with a limited
budget. What would be the three innovations
you would propose for reducing risk in an
efficient manner?

I think that the most important thing is to invest in
education at all levels. Education refers not only to
school children. Education is also for parents and
citizens. There are many different ways to educate
people. In this context, it would be important to
look at high-profile issues, such as climate change,
environmental protection and even the economic
crisis. One way to address the current economic crisis
is by reducing the risks associated with natural hazards,
because they are very costly. This would be a way to
save money in order to mitigate the economic crisis.
Risk reduction is key in the area of climate change,
both in terms of adapting to it and reducing its adverse
effects. So we must include the issue of risk reduction
in all these areas, and this is what I would promote if I
had enough money to raise awareness on the issue.

What are your expectations for the Regional
Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction? In your
opinion, what changes will it bring about?

During this session of the Regional Platform, we expect
to start a team-building process with agencies working
in disaster risk reduction in the region and with
governments. The idea is that governments get used to
more frequent, regular discussions among themselves
and with agencies, in order to find common solutions
to address hazards, which pose a risk to all countries.
The Regional Platform would facilitate this discussion
and serve as a forum. This is what we would like to see
come out of this meeting.

Do you feel like you are making a difference
through your daily work? What is the vision
that guides you?

In my everyday work, I try to explain this issue as much
as I can with everyone I talk to, but without becoming
tedious, because one cannot only talk about this all
the time. But I think that there are many occasions
— when I am talking to friends, relatives, or at the
office— when it is appropriate to raise the issue of
risk reduction. I also reinforce the idea that there are
very simple actions that people can take in their daily
lives to reduce risk. What I try to do every day is to
talk about and promote this issue as much as I can.
It is like missionary work, like religion. Some espouse
a particular religion, while we are doing something
similar by raising awareness among people that they
must and they can reduce risk to natural hazards in
their daily lives.